Rankiteo Logo
Rankiteo
Leader in Cyber Underwriting
Loading...
NEWRankiteo Cyber Underwriting Desktop - Score, price, and bind from your desktop
WindowsmacOSLinux
Download
Analyze » Guesty » LITSPGGUECHE1777407909

Incident Score: Analysis & Impact (LITSPGGUECHE1777407909)

The details regarding individual company incidents & reports gives you full view from every side.

Rankiteo Score Impact Analysis

Rankiteo Incident Impact-31
Company Score Before Incident774 / 1000
Company Score After Incident743 / 1000
INCIDENT NUMBERLITSPGGUECHE1777407909
Type of Cyber IncidentCyber Attack
ATTACK VECTORSupply-chain attack
DATA EXPOSEDPermanent data destruction (files >128KB)
INCIDENT DATE14/04/2026
STATUSOngoing

Key Highlights From The Incident Analysis

  • Timeline of Guesty's Cyber Attack and lateral movement inside company's environment.
  • Overview of affected data sets, including SSNs and PHI, and why they materially increase incident severity.
  • How Rankiteo’s incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score.
  • How this cyber incident impacts Guesty Rankiteo cyber scoring and cyber rating.
  • Rankiteo’s MITRE ATT&CK correlation analysis for this incident, with associated confidence level.

Full Incident Analysis Transcript

In this Rankiteo incident briefing, we review the Guesty breach identified under incident ID LITSPGGUECHE1777407909.

The analysis begins with a detailed overview of Guesty's information like the linkedin page: https://www.linkedin.com/company/guesty, the number of followers: 97755, the industry type: Technology, Information and Internet and the number of employees: 805 employees

After the initial compromise, the video explains how Rankiteo's incident engine converts technical details into a normalized incident score. The incident score before the incident was 774 and after the incident was 743 with a difference of -31 which is could be a good indicator of the severity and impact of the incident.

In the next step of the video, we will analyze in more details the incident and the impact it had on Guesty and their customers.

On 15 April 2024, Guesty disclosed Ransomware (Wiper Malware) issues under the banner "Vect Ransomware Turns Out to Be a Wiper, Destroying Victims’ Data Instead of Encrypting It".

A recent wave of supply-chain attacks targeting tools like Trivy and LiteLLM has left victims with little hope of data recovery, even after paying ransoms.

The disruption is felt across the environment, affecting Windows, Linux and ESXi, and exposing Permanent data destruction (files >128KB).

Formal response steps have not been shared publicly yet.

The case underscores how Ongoing, teams are taking away lessons such as Supply-chain attacks can lead to irreversible data loss even if ransom is paid. Ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) platforms may have critical flaws that prevent data recovery, and recommending next steps like Organizations should verify the legitimacy of ransomware strains before paying ransoms. Enhanced monitoring and segmentation can mitigate supply-chain attack risks.

Finally, we try to match the incident with the MITRE ATT&CK framework to see if there is any correlation between the incident and the MITRE ATT&CK framework.

The MITRE ATT&CK framework is a knowledge base of techniques and sub-techniques that are used to describe the tactics and procedures of cyber adversaries. It is a powerful tool for understanding the threat landscape and for developing effective defense strategies.

MITRE ATT&CK® Correlation Analysis

Rankiteo's analysis has identified several MITRE ATT&CK tactics and techniques associated with this incident, each with varying levels of confidence based on available evidence. Under the Initial Access tactic, the analysis identified Supply Chain Compromise (T1195) with high confidence (95%), with evidence including supply-chain attacks targeting tools like Trivy and LiteLLM, and initial_access_broker.entry point such as Supply-chain compromises (Trivy, LiteLLM, Checkmarx, Telnyx) and Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (T1195.002) with high confidence (90%), with evidence including compromised security and developer tools like Checkmarx and Telnyx, and attack vector such as Supply-chain attack. Under the Execution tactic, the analysis identified Exploitation for Client Execution (T1203) with moderate to high confidence (80%), with evidence including malware available for Windows, Linux, and ESXi, and vect 2.0 ransomware builder accessed by researchers and User Execution: Malicious File (T1204.002) with moderate to high confidence (70%), supported by evidence indicating ransomware-as-a-service (RaaS) integrated with BreachForums for malware access. Under the Impact tactic, the analysis identified Data Destruction (T1485) with high confidence (98%), with evidence including permanently wiping any data larger than 128KB, data encryption such as False (data wiped, not encrypted), and irreversible data loss and Defacement: Internal Defacement (T1491.001) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating vect’s leak site listed 25 organizations with extortion efforts. Under the Defense Evasion tactic, the analysis identified Obfuscated Files or Information (T1027) with moderate to high confidence (70%), with evidence including libsodium-based encryption used in Vect 2.0, and poor implementation described as amateur execution and Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion (T1497) with moderate confidence (50%), supported by evidence indicating malware targets ESXi, suggesting evasion of virtualized environments. Under the Exfiltration tactic, the analysis identified Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (T1567.002) with moderate confidence (60%), supported by evidence indicating vect claimed 700GB (Guesty) and 250GB (S&P Global) data allegedly exfiltrated. These correlations help security teams understand the attack chain and develop appropriate defensive measures based on the observed tactics and techniques.

Initial Access
Supply Chain Compromise (95%)
Supply Chain Compromise: Compromise Software Supply Chain (90%)
Execution
Exploitation for Client Execution (80%)
User Execution: Malicious File (70%)
Impact
Data Destruction (98%)
Defacement: Internal Defacement (60%)
Defense Evasion
Obfuscated Files or Information (70%)
Virtualization/Sandbox Evasion (50%)
Exfiltration
Exfiltration Over Web Service: Exfiltration to Cloud Storage (60%)

Sources & References